Evolution is NOT science: A challenge

Considering all the soundbites that are out there today, I doubt that you will be able to escape your fate. 50 years from now, when you are rich and famous, your empire will collapse overnite after someone posts on a news paper "Evolution is a religion.-Glordag"

---

The Laminator

​

intentional misquotes are fun too.like "evolution is [...] a religion"(where [...] = "not")

Ya. One time in English class, my instructor gave us an example on a local newspaper. They were interviewing someone in the education department. Anyway, they asked her if she supported sex ed in public schools, and she responded something along the line of "yes, I support sex education... something something... to help fight against spread of std's and... blah blah blah."Anyway, she basically said that she supported better education on the issue so that children are less vulnerable to std's and teen pregnancy. We then got an article by some religious organization with a big headline "She wants to teach our children on how to have sex!"Interesting on how many different ways you can misquote or misrepresent someone.

---

The Laminator

​

quote:

---

Considering all the soundbites that are out there today, I doubt that you will be able to escape your fate. 50 years from now, when you are rich and famous, your empire will collapse overnite after someone posts on a news paper "Evolution is a religion.-Glordag"

---

Since you have already proven yourself to be a prophet in another thread, I would ask you to kindly retract this prediction. Thank you.

I think you fail to understand creation. It's not neccessarily true that the first ever singlecelled organism is a creation event which made the existence of plants later on a relative certainty. In turn the origin of the first single celled organism may be predetermined to happen within a timeframe from some point previous. Why do you not consciously understand a method which in all probability you practice in everyday life?You are evidently not inclined to support the facts of creation, only the facts of evolution, it is prejudicial. As a basic understanding of creation you should consider events where the outcome is not predetermined, such as choice. Your lack of basic understanding of creation is already evidence that evolutionists deny, and or ignore creation. Talk to an evolutionist about choice, things turning out one way or another, and 10 to 1 they conjure up a material cause which predetermined the outcome of the event, denying choice. Materialism of the gaps, so to speak.It's difficult to find evidence if or not evolutionists deny the fundamentalist christian story of creation, but accept creation in general. I certainly have never found any such acceptance of creation in general terms, on the contrary. I assume you're just being oppositional to say you have the impression that evolutionists accept creation in general, although I admit that an impression is soft evidence.regards,
Mohammad Nor Syamsu

Yes, but a theistic evolutionist is different, as I've been trying to tell you this whole time. A theistic evolutionist thinks evolution happened, but still believes in God. Said theistic evolutionist does NOT believe creation happened as in the garden of eden etc. But he DOES believe in God despite this.

---

Wanna feel God? Step onto the wrestling mat and you'd be crazy to deny the uplifting spirit. http://www.BadPreacher.5u.com (incomplete, but look anyway!)

Well, not sure about you bein' a prophet, but I dislike working with other Christians sometimes for this very reason. Too quick to jump to conclusions, and usually negative ones unless the other person is (surprise) another fundie Christian!This one in particular made me laugh! In a way, if she really wants to teach HOW to have sex it might be a good thing. Imagine being some fundie couple that finally married and can now have sex in holy wedlock. But you don't know how! What are you gonna do?! Call Pastor Born2Preach? No, he'll just go "I told you so!" Maybe mom and dad?!Hopefully that illustrates the point.

---

Wanna feel God? Step onto the wrestling mat and you'd be crazy to deny the uplifting spirit. http://www.BadPreacher.5u.com (incomplete, but look anyway!)

There you go, persecute the prophet.

---

The Laminator

​

quote:

---

I think you fail to understand creation. It's not neccessarily true that the first ever singlecelled organism is a creation event which made the existence of plants later on a relative certainty. In turn the origin of the first single celled organism may be predetermined to happen within a timeframe from some point previous. Why do you not consciously understand a method which in all probability you practice in everyday life?

---

Well, I've mentioned the creation of the universe, the creation of life, and the creation of mankind, and you insist that none of these are what you are talking about. Based on this, I really no longer have any idea what you are talking about when you say 'creation' and 'predetermined'. Feel free to explain, if you will.

quote:

---

You are evidently not inclined to support the facts of creation, only the facts of evolution, it is prejudicial.

---

As above, I no longer know what you mean by 'creation', thus you may be correct in saying that I do not support the facts of this 'creation'. Until you explain to me just what you mean, I'll give you the benefit of the doubt.

quote:

---

As a basic understanding of creation you should consider events where the outcome is not predetermined, such as choice. Your lack of basic understanding of creation is already evidence that evolutionists deny, and or ignore creation. Talk to an evolutionist about choice, things turning out one way or another, and 10 to 1 they conjure up a material cause which predetermined the outcome of the event, denying choice. Materialism of the gaps, so to speak.

---

Though I will acknowledge that I seem to have little understanding of your concept of 'creation', I will claim that it is your fault that I lack such an understanding, not mine. Furthermore, I've already said that some evolutionists might deny or ignore creation, but look at Born2Preach and his arguments concerning that topic. I agree that humans (and indeed, many living things) have choices. The fact is, however, that the choices that are made have affects on the rest of the world. Everything is a result of something else, up to a point. Nobody ever claimed that evolutionists do not believe in choice.

quote:

---

It's difficult to find evidence if or not evolutionists deny the fundamentalist christian story of creation, but accept creation in general. I certainly have never found any such acceptance of creation in general terms, on the contrary. I assume you're just being oppositional to say you have the impression that evolutionists accept creation in general, although I admit that an impression is soft evidence.

---

How can anybody deny some sort of creation? We had to get here somehow! That's like saying nothing is real! I'm sure I can gather some evidence that supports 10/10 evolutionists believing in some sort of creation. Whether that creation is of a supernatural nature or not, that's a different story. But then, this mixup might again come from your skewed (from the usual sense, anyways) definition of 'creation'.Perhaps once we have an agreement on the definition of 'creation' we can continue this discussion.This message has been edited by Glordag, 07-20-2004 03:17 PM

Well you know, prophecy is unnatural. Based on this, I would have to say it is sinful, and thus, I must persecute you. In fact, I rather feel like burning you on the stake. *gets a torch*

premeditated??

Hi Syamsu, I am very interested in the Theory of Creation VS the Theory of Evolution. Could you provide a list of the facts (or observations) of which you speak? I'd also be interested in an outline of the Theory of Creation so I can get a handle on the hypothesis.thanx
PM1K

Hi, good to see you here.I'm sorry to ask, but do you think you could make your avatar stop spinning? I can't stop staring at it and it's REALLY hurting my eyes.
Thanks.

quote:

---

It means that many people who accept evolution theory, still have problems with it in regards to their Christianity, regardless if you think they should have problems with it or not.

---

And where does this problem stem from? I think it stems from the dogmatic position that one must believe in a literal Genesis in order to be saved. It is not the fault of science that this problem occurs, but rather the need for church leaders to have control over their followers.

quote:

---

As before the method of creationism is to trace back to the root cause, as the creation event, which had the effect of making the thing appear. It applies to anything, and is not just confined to what is in biblehistory. It is strange that you question a way of investigaiton which you probably practice every day.

---

I know this was not addressed to me, but you know me.Let's take the creationist method and see if it does apply to everyday life. Let us say that my car keys are missing. If I were a creationist type thinker I would start with the conclusion. So, my conclusion is that some invisible fairies stole my car keys. Now, the fact that I can't see any fairies supports my conclusion. Next, I find my car keys in the sofa cushion. Starting from my conclusion, I now have to conclude that the invisible fairies live in my couch.Or, I could use the scientific approach. Observation: human memory is not perfect, so I may have left them in the car. Observation: previously, I lost my car keys because they fell out of my pocket. Observation: I don't remember having them after leaving the couch. Observation: I have never seen a supernatural event affect my keys. Test: I look in the couch and in the car, they are in the couch. Conclusion: The car keys probably fell out of my pocket while I was on the couch.This is how I do things. You seem to be ok with adding invisible fairies to the mix.

quote:

---

The reason is it on topic is because the denial of evolutionists of creation is political / religious, which makes evolution a religion rather then a science in the context of the creation vs evolution controversy.

---

Is being a heliocentrist considered being religious? Is being a roundearther considered being religious? Why is it a religious movement whenever science defends itself from pseudoscientists with a political agenda?

Loudmouth, As long as you don't compare the fairies, you should be OK. That doesn't happen in nature, or supernature.Mark

---

There are 10 kinds of people in this world; those that understand binary, & those that don't